It really just depends on your play style within your profession. Each profession will have multiple play styles so tailor your build according to that. For example, a ranger can melee just as well as he can be ranged. So if you prefer to melee as a ranger than you might want to consider those stats yes, at least if you are concerned about survivability.
Depends how you build your character ..if you want be more tanky, okey, go for survivability. But again, without agro system, you can't just glue mobs on you.
Vitality increase your health, Toughness will increase your defense, Power your damage, Precision your crit chance.
Think i answered this for you in the GW2 vs SWTOR vs WoW thread but here is a copy and paste of that:
for reference Stats = Attributes in GW2
As you level up in GW2 you earn attributes that you can destribute to Power, Toughness, Vitality, or Precision (an explination can be seen HERE)
So you get to choose which stats you want to build up. To give you an example that might relate, if you made a Ranger (GW2's version of hunter) You can build you Ranger how you see fit, more defensive you'd build toughness and vitality. More offensive would be precision and power, or you can mix however you want... tons of health and tons of crit, go for precision and vitality.
How this works on gear: You aquire gear in your usual methods, bosses, pvp, pve, etc. Now when you aquire a piece of gear that has the attributes you want but say you don't like the look of it or maybe it's a different type of armor than you can use, you can use a transmutation stone to move those attributes to the piece of gear that you would like to use.
Hope this helps
TL;DR - You get to spec your character for what you want to be proficient at. There is no hunters want agility, warriors want strength,.... etc
Check out the wiki page he linked for you, it pretty much explains what each stat does.
Is it just me or is the Engineer pretty damn... AWESOME?
Originally Posted by Blizzard EntertainmentFor the first half of geological time our ancestors were bacteria. Most creatures still are bacteria, and each one of our trillions of cells is a colony of bacteria.
Richard Dawkins
Everybody got their own unique opinion, myself don't like it very much. But, I am Ranger biased, me likez petz!
---------- Post added 2011-05-25 at 05:19 PM ----------
When you say "real", I assume it means "it won't be open for people".
Awww.
Kindasorta.
Without a dedicated agro system, the game's going to be a lot more like d&d. (Which, by the way, I really like - I've always wondered why Arthas didn't just ignore the tanks and smack our healers first thing.) Ideally, monsters will have an advanced enough AI to make a tactical decision along the lines of "what is my best option right now?". It won't be as good as a player, obviously, because humans think two or three steps ahead (at least).
In that kind of a world, each player is more responsible for their own survival, which is what necessitates each character being a hybrid of all (or at least two) roles. With more than one (or even a handful, in large groups) player being the target of all the monsters, damage becomes underwhelming; the ability to help your allies out becomes very powerful, as does the ability to hinder your enemies, because these have to take the place of a dedicated tank in providing for the survival of the group. However, a character that doesn't bring any damage hinders himself and his group by elongating combat, which stresses resources (WoW players know this as "oh crap out of innervates and everyone's going oom what do we do").
In the most basic terms, "support" is a catch-all term for "helps out your allies". "Control" is a catch-all term for "makes life harder for your foes". Skills can and will be mixes of the two - not every attack skill is going to be Power Attack, because that would make physical characters underpowered. You're going to have things like Bull's Strike, which will knock things down in addition to dealing damage - that's damage and control combined. Orison of Healing would be a support skill; Weapon of Shadow (buffs an ally to blind foes on hit) would be both support and control. Blinding Flash would be pure control. Lastly, damage and support would be covered by something like Vengeful Weapon (which enchants an ally to steal health from his attacker the next time he's hit). I predict ANet will have to be careful around support, control, and support + control skills, because as GW showed, having too much of either (or even too much of both) makes it so you can essentially ignore your defenses and pile on the offense (which has already been brought up to compensate for its previously limited value).
If you've played GW PvP before (and, y'know, gotten to know the terminology and strategies and such), it may help you to think of support and control as defensive and offensive utility, respectively. Naturally, this means that some skills fulfill both roles. Crippling Shot is the most classic example in GW - you can use it offensively to stop a critical target from escaping, or you can use it defensively to stop a melee unit attacking your ally.
Also, high health and high armor on non-tank characters is still useful. It adds a tactical element to combat - you want things to hit your Guardian and not your Elementalist, but you need to figure out how to make that happen. Combined with all of the above, combat looks like it'll unfold to favor balanced groups of melee and casters, where the melee provide the damage and control to keep the foes' attention and casters provide the support to keep the melee alive, plus damage and control to make combat easier on the whole team.
Last edited by Armond; 2011-05-25 at 04:50 PM.